local reviewer

[+sea_cucumber101]

Hello all you bright eyed young people you! iv not been a member for very long but i was wondering if any one had met their local reviwer and what kind of a job you think they are doing, ie do they go to check the caches themself do u have good rapour with them, are they fair or a strick geonazi. My local reviwer is dalesmanX and i have to say i dont think hes very good. Iv waited for about 5 days befor a cache is reviwed and also iv had no notice when hes about to archive one of my caches. futher more when iv asked him questions iv never had a reply. so let me know what you think of your local reviwer maby there is some hope left. Peace and love to all the geo-peoples all over the world

[+webscouter.]

I have never meet a reviewer who wasn't fair and even handed. I appreciate the fact that they volunteer their time to review caches and are taking time out from their family and own caching time to help out the sport.

 

All three of my reviewers are the best in the nation though. Thanks Glen, Glenn and ?

 

I have to say that publicly criticizing your reviewer might not have the effect that you desire.

[+maxkim]

Well I have to say that we have had the total opposite of your experience with Dalesman X. He is always helpful and friendly... even when you give him a pile of poo to sort out (As we have on occasion!!)_When you look at the number of caches he reviews per day it's huge. There are always times when a reviewer is 'off line' with holidays etc and this may account for your delay. As to not replying we have never found that from any reviewer. All the reviewers are volunteers and, as he is also an active cacher, the time he gives should be appreciated. :) MaxKim

[+keehotee]

Hello all you bright eyed young people you! iv not been a member for very long but i was wondering if any one had met their local reviwer and what kind of a job you think they are doing, ie do they go to check the caches themself do u have good rapour with them, are they fair or a strick geonazi. My local reviwer is dalesmanX and i have to say i dont think hes very good. Iv waited for about 5 days befor a cache is reviwed and also iv had no notice when hes about to archive one of my caches. futher more when iv asked him questions iv never had a reply. so let me know what you think of your local reviwer maby there is some hope left. Peace and love to all the geo-peoples all over the world

 

You've managed to get 35 hides reviewed in the four months you've been caching - I'd say that's not bad going as far as your local reviewer's concerned....

[+NattyBooshka]

My reviewers were very good, easy to talk to, and effecient. They've retired now, and deserve to enjoy themselves again!

 

Don't know who's my local reviewer... seen names on caches, but as people here list in 2 regions for the same town, which is a real gripe of mine, so it's not obvious who I'd deal with.

 

Found a few that have been published by Royal Oak, and have to say they appear to have been dealt with efficiently judging by the "date hidden" field. Of course that also means the COs have done their job right from the start and made it possible for the reviewer to do their stuff, so hats off to both sides. At the end of the day, a lot depends on the CO... of the ones I listed way back, some sailed through, some needed a bit of a discussion.

 

As for the reviewers, well, what can I say? They give up their free time (with an ever increasing workload) for little or no reward, and that means they have less time doing what they love doing... getting stung by nettles, tics, soaked by rain, muddy, and freezing cold in the pursuit of a point for finding a film canister! Without them, there is no game, and I love the game.. therefore, reviewers I love you all!

[+sea_cucumber101]

could there be other ways to review, ie a peer to peer system. I apreciate the fact that all reviwers take time out of their day, but is this really the best system? from our experience a hands on approache would be better but completely impossible with so few reviewers. However a peer to peer system would allow for every cache to be visited before it is published.

[Pup Patrol]

could there be other ways to review, ie a peer to peer system. I apreciate the fact that all reviwers take time out of their day, but is this really the best system? from our experience a hands on approache would be better but completely impossible with so few reviewers. However a peer to peer system would allow for every cache to be visited before it is published.

 

Good grief, I hope Groundspeak never adopts the peer-to-peer system.

 

The reviewers here are more than adequate. They don't operate in a vacuum, and are well-versed in Groundspeak's Guidelines.

 

I suspect that most "problems" with a reviewer actually are with the communication that cache hiders don't respond to.

 

Having 35 caches published in 4 months is astonishing to me. It also proves to me that the reviewer is doing his job just fine.

 

If a reviewer feels that he is not able to handle the workload, he will request help from other reviewers and from Groundspeak.

 

I have a very hard time believing that a reviewer is so uncommunicative, or would archive caches without communicating with the cache owner.

 

There's another side to this story. Whether we hear it or not is another matter.

[+NattyBooshka]

could there be other ways to review, ie a peer to peer system. I apreciate the fact that all reviwers take time out of their day, but is this really the best system? from our experience a hands on approache would be better but completely impossible with so few reviewers. However a peer to peer system would allow for every cache to be visited before it is published.

Yeah... there's a peer to peer system on the other site owned by a well know GPSr manufacturer... but there are very few caches on there so far. Issues with the system as I see them:

 

1) One day it's going to become a flame war

2) FTF hunters can start heading for it BEFORE it's approved

3) they have a 12 hour review time, and if you fail to get approval, you have to start all over again... unlike here where you and the reviewer can discuss. Reviewers, from experience and also what I hear, help to get caches listed rather than refuse them altogether where possible.

4) There is probably a majority here who hate urban nanos, so may vote them for non-approval, then the minority who like them can't have them.

5) Does everybody know what land is owned by NT/FC/council etc etc?

 

Can't see the system lasting if/when that site gets busy.

 

Currently looking at their system with one of my caches from here for a dual listing.

Edited June 10, 2011 by NattyBooshka

[+MBFace]

Perhaps the OP should find another hobby where the volunteers live up to his obviously high standards of service. I find it hard to believe that anyone would use the forums to sla9 off his local reviewer in this way.

 

Looking at recent logs for GC2R7B5 and GC2V25M proved interesting reading

Edited June 10, 2011 by MBFace

[+NattyBooshka]

Perhaps the OP should find another hobby where the volunteers live up to his obviously high standards of service. I find it hard to believe that anyone would use the forums to sla9 off his local reviewers in this way.

 

Looking at recent logs for GC2R7B5 and GC2V25M proved interesting reading

Well... the other site allows pretty much all caches in 12 hours... which may be what the OP is looking for... but I don't think it will be good for the hobby when the landowners have little if any say... I see trouble ahead!

[+*mouse*]

could there be other ways to review, ie a peer to peer system. I apreciate the fact that all reviwers take time out of their day, but is this really the best system? from our experience a hands on approache would be better but completely impossible with so few reviewers. However a peer to peer system would allow for every cache to be visited before it is published.

 

There are other listing sites out there that use peer review. If you don't like the way it's done here then there you can always use them. Personally speaking I think the reviewing on this site is amongst the best of all caching sites and it would be to the site's detriment to adopt a peer review system.

 

A visit to each cache is not practical - caching is growing exponentially and just seems a ridiculously complicated undertaking. Besides what makes a cache visitor any more quialified to judge a cache. Surely it's much better to have a small dedicated team who have a detailed knowledge of local land owner agreements and UK guidelines? You couldn't expect every cacher out there to have this level of knowledge. If a regular cacher finds an issue with a cache then that is what the 'Needs Archive' and 'Needs Maintenance' flags are for.

 

As for the cache of yours that was archived, from what DalesmanX has written on the cache page it appears that his decision was well founded. If there is a problem with a cache and you have chosen to ignore it when it's flagged up to you(preferring instead to delete the logs that have brought it to your attention) then don't be surprised to see an archive log. This makes your proposal for peer review seem even more contradictory. Clearly your peers have given you advice on that cache and rather than take that on board you have removed their logs!!!!

 

If you work with TPTB and other cachers then they will work with you. If you don't - expect action to be taken that you might not like.

[+The Patrician]

Hello all you bright eyed young people...............

 

I think the school holidays may have started.

[Pup Patrol]

Perhaps the OP should find another hobby where the volunteers live up to his obviously high standards of service. I find it hard to believe that anyone would use the forums to sla9 off his local reviewer in this way.

 

Looking at recent logs for GC2R7B5 and GC2V25M proved interesting reading

 

Oh, that darned reviewer! How dare he do his job?

 

It's pretty common that when someone posts on the forums complaining about the reviewer that the proper channels have been ignored by the cache hider.

 

As I said, the idea that a reviewer doesn't communicate with the cache hider is rather difficult to accept.

[+NattyBooshka]

could there be other ways to review, ie a peer to peer system. I apreciate the fact that all reviwers take time out of their day, but is this really the best system? from our experience a hands on approache would be better but completely impossible with so few reviewers. However a peer to peer system would allow for every cache to be visited before it is published.

As for the cache of yours that was archived, from what DalesmanX has written on the cache page it appears that his decision was well founded. If there is a problem with a cache and you have chosen to ignore it when it's flagged up to you(preferring instead to delete the logs that have brought it to your attention) then don't be surprised to see an archive log. This makes your proposal for peer review seem even more contradictory. Clearly your peers have given you advice on that cache and rather than take that on board you have removed their logs!!!!

Just had a peek... and I'm surprised that people found it at all! Seems the last one was sensible and didn't attempt it. The last found log is interesting though as it appears to have been muggled by others climbing fences! I'm wondering if there was another way in and why the barbed wire was there, but the reviewer does indeed appear to have acted in the best interests of the game, as well as to the guidelines/rules.

 

This very morning on my way to a cache I came to a style that was now part of a barbed wire fence too... think the farmer didn't like having a footpath on his land... took another path round, then on my way back took a diversion onto the footpath right past his house!

[+NattyBooshka]

I find it hard to believe that anyone would use the forums to sla9 off his local reviewer in this way.

 

Yes, but this way I guess the reviewers won't have to be distracted... we can all respond to the sla99ing!

[+Bear and Ragged]

As for the cache of yours that was archived, from what DalesmanX has written on the cache page it appears that his decision was well founded. If there is a problem with a cache and you have chosen to ignore it when it's flagged up to you(preferring instead to delete the logs that have brought it to your attention) then don't be surprised to see an archive log. This makes your proposal for peer review seem even more contradictory. Clearly your peers have given you advice on that cache and rather than take that on board you have removed their logs!!!!

 

If you work with TPTB and other cachers then they will work with you. If you don't - expect action to be taken that you might not like.

I agree!

[+sea_cucumber101]

well iv learned my lesson then. the less i say the better.

[+Bear and Ragged]

Especially if you think about including:

 

are they fair or a strick geonazi.

[+sea_cucumber101]

cheers, ... for all your helpful comments

[+firestars]

I did have a reviewer ask me to move a cache, so that it was further away from a current one.

 

He wouldnt have it when I explained that if I move it further away it will actually be closer, due to a 4 Lane uncrossable A road, but he just wouldnt have it!

 

So, its live now and a dadgum sight closer to the other cache then its original location.

 

Still, what can you do? My local Reviewers in East Anglia seems to be doing a great job.

Edited June 10, 2011 by firestars

[+Al 7365]

My local reviewer is the Long Man and he does an excellent job, quick and always trys to help you with your problems. I think it is very harsh of anyone to critisise any of the UK reviewers giving the excellent job they do.

[+thehoomer]

cheers, ... for all your helpful comments

 

Perhaps sea_cucumber is unaware, the reviewers read these forums too. Publicly biting the caching hand which feeds you is perhaps not the best way forward to solving your issues . I'm certain you can resolve anything (obviously, not colliding protons or lead nuclei in a tea cup) if you contact your reviewer directly and give them adequate time to respond.

[+Pharisee]

I think it is very harsh of anyone to critisise any of the UK reviewers giving the excellent job they do.

 

 

No.... No-one, Reviewers included, should be immune from criticism... if the criticism is justified.

 

My local reviwer is dalesmanX and i have to say i dont think hes very good. Iv waited for about 5 days befor a cache is reviwed and also iv had no notice when hes about to archive one of my caches. futher more when iv asked him questions iv never had a reply.

 

The OP obviously believes he has a number of grievances and he has a right to discuss those grievances on the forum. That's what a forum is for....

Edited June 10, 2011 by Pharisee

[+thehoomer]

I think it is very harsh of anyone to critisise any of the UK reviewers giving the excellent job they do.

 

 

No.... No-one, Reviewers included, should be immune from criticism... if the criticism is justified.

 

My local reviwer is dalesmanX and i have to say i dont think hes very good. Iv waited for about 5 days befor a cache is reviwed and also iv had no notice when hes about to archive one of my caches. futher more when iv asked him questions iv never had a reply.

 

The OP obviously believes he has a number of grievances and he has a right to discuss those grievances on the forum. That's what a forum is for....

MMMMmmmmm, never thought about it like that, good point well made Pharisee. I think the subject matter just touches a few nerves because it would seem that most are happy with the reviewers. Yes, you are right of course, as far as I'm aware there are no banned topics (within reason )

Edited for:

I think some of sea cucumber's wording may have ruffled a few feathers too .

Edited June 10, 2011 by thehoomer

[+sea_cucumber101]

thank you, at this very moment im trying to enable a cache, of which iv been trying to enable for a few days now. the cache is called crystal maze 2. At first i thought this should be a mystery unknow or puzzle cache. so thats how i filled out the forms etc.. after being told by my local reviwer thats its not a puzzle cache, i bit the bullet and made the changes but amended my text to say that my local reviwer would not let me have it as a puzzle/unkown. i was asked to amend my text and remove the line quote:

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i wanted it to be a puzzle/mystery,unknow cache but dalesmanX (reviewer) wouldnt allow it. sorry for any confusion this may bring.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

so i changed it to " i wanted it to be a puzzle/mystery,unknow but was not allowed because of the guidlines. sorry for any confusion this may bring."

to wich i was told

 

Forgive me but I just don't understand what point you are trying to prove. Your text, as has been pointed out before, is unnecessary and should be removed.

If you are not willing to do that then this cache may be archived (please take that as a pre-event warning!).

 

i however dont feel that it is unessasery. i still do think that it is a puzzle cache but have amended the cache details so that it is traditional and has the field puzzle atribute, i honestly believe my local reviwer is making things hard for me and also it would seem threatening me

[+sea_cucumber101]

may i just say sorry to anyone i may have unintentionaly offended

[+Bear and Ragged]

may i just say sorry to anyone i may have unintentionaly offended

 

 

Maybe the question to the Reviewer/Reviewers is: "How do I change this to make it an Unknown/Puzzle, rather than a Trad?"

 

It seems you got part 1 through.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Bear and Ragged

[+NickandAliandEliza]

may i just say sorry to anyone i may have unintentionaly offended

 

Like dalesmanX maybe?

[+NattyBooshka]

i honestly believe my local reviwer is making things hard for me and also it would seem threatening me

Threatening you?

[+sea_cucumber101]

i honestly believe my local reviwer is making things hard for me and also it would seem threatening me

Threatening you?

(please take that as a pre-event warning!).

[+NattyBooshka]

What Pharisee said is spot on... here is the place to air a grievance.

 

I did it here for the right reasons once, and got told by a former reviewer who I respect 100% to take it to the GAGB forums. I did and again did it in the wrong way... for that bit I'll always be sorry, but for airing the grievance I'll always be proud. It's taken me several years of undercover caching to be willing to come back here. I'm older, wiser and a bit less hot headed... but I've lost none of my passion. Maybe the OP will feel the same one day?

 

To the OP though... what is the grievance that you have? Is it the 5 day delay for publishing or the archiving of the cache? There are lots of experienced CO's out there that can help you get everything spot on before submitting it to a reviewer, like I brushed upon earlier the more a CO does, the easier the review process is for all. Maybe with experience you can get a cache past approved by DalesmanX in less than 5 days as others have.

[+NattyBooshka]

i honestly believe my local reviwer is making things hard for me and also it would seem threatening me

Threatening you?

(please take that as a pre-event warning!).

Sorry... lost me!

[+sTeamTraen]

The OP obviously believes he has a number of grievances and he has a right to discuss those grievances on the forum. That's what a forum is for....

MMMMmmmmm, never thought about it like that, good point well made Pharisee.

I could not disagree more. The deal with cache submission is that it's between you, the reviewer who "picks up" your cache, and Groundspeak.

 

Bringing the matter to the forums is unfair to the reviewer because it would be unethical for them to discuss the details of a case in public. We know from past examples that cache owners who bring complaints to the forum have (more than occasionally) been known to omit one or two crucial details, or otherwise be a little economical with the truth.

 

If you have a problem with a reviewer's handling of one of your caches, the correct thing to do is to write to appeals@geocaching.com, giving the "GC Code" and any other information that isn't in the Reviewer Notes (which should be how you've been communicating with the reviewer), and ask Groundspeak to arbitrate. If you have a more general problem with a reviewer's behaviour, you can escalate to volunteers@geocaching.com. Both of those addresses have Lackeys behind them who take their job seriously.

[+sea_cucumber101]

i think i have gone into this too hot headed, the problems iv had are most likely the conciqences of my actions, and a lack of comunication from me to the reviwer your last post was most helpfull and i appreciate you spending the time to write it.

[+dalesmanX]

I've kept out of this up to now but....

In the initial entry appeared:

also iv had no notice when hes about to archive one of my caches.

.

 

Now, when I give warning that a cache may be archived for non-compliance, I see:

and also it would seem threatening me

 

Also, I see:

futher more when iv asked him questions iv never had a reply.

I have searched my Emails and found none from this cacher.

 

Draw your own conclusions!

Edited June 10, 2011 by dalesmanX

[+NattyBooshka]

I've kept out of this up to now but....

In the initial entry appeared:

also iv had no notice when hes about to archive one of my caches.

.

 

Now, when I give warning that a cache may be archived for non-compliance, I see:

and also it would seem threatening me

 

Draw your own conclusions!

Well done for staying out of it so long.

 

Conclusions were probably drawn by COs who have you as their reviewer a long time before the topic was opened.

 

You can't please all of the people all of the time...

 

Keep up the good work!

Edited June 10, 2011 by NattyBooshka

[+Simply Paul]

All reviewers are brilliant.

 

It's just some are more brilliant than others.

 

Edited to add the conversation's moved on a bit since I loaded the page (before I went to the gym) and while my comment still stands, it's in answer to the topic title's question rather than a reply to any specific ongoing situation.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Simply Paul

[+NattyBooshka]

Ok... it's Friday... I have some nice red stuff on the go... I'm relaxed.

 

Re-read the thread.

 

Can the OP give us a reason that the cache should NOT have been archived? That seems to be lacking from the discussion, and since it's been put in front of the people's court here in the forums, I think that is necessary evidence. From reading the logs on that cache, it appears that the reviewer did his/her job very well. There is also suspicion of deleted logs. I delete my own NM logs once the cache is repaired so that my NM isn't in people's PQs... but I wouldn't expect a CO to do it without good reason.

 

On face value, if I was on the jury, I'd be finding the defendant reviewer not guilty without any shadow of a doubt.

[+thehoomer]

All reviewers are brilliant.

 

It's just some are more brilliant than others.

 

Edited to add the conversation's moved on a bit since I loaded the page (before I went to the gym) and while my comment still stands, it's in answer to the topic title's question rather than a reply to any specific ongoing situation.

Darn it, you got in before me SP.

The OP simply asked for our thoughts on reviewers, after expressing his disappointment(?) with his own & to that end, I still agree with Pharisee.

[+thehoomer]

The OP obviously believes he has a number of grievances and he has a right to discuss those grievances on the forum. That's what a forum is for....

MMMMmmmmm, never thought about it like that, good point well made Pharisee.

I could not disagree more. The deal with cache submission is that it's between you, the reviewer who "picks up" your cache, and Groundspeak.

 

Bringing the matter to the forums is unfair to the reviewer because it would be unethical for them to discuss the details of a case in public. We know from past examples that cache owners who bring complaints to the forum have (more than occasionally) been known to omit one or two crucial details, or otherwise be a little economical with the truth.

 

If you have a problem with a reviewer's handling of one of your caches, the correct thing to do is to write to appeals@geocaching.com, giving the "GC Code" and any other information that isn't in the Reviewer Notes (which should be how you've been communicating with the reviewer), and ask Groundspeak to arbitrate. If you have a more general problem with a reviewer's behaviour, you can escalate to volunteers@geocaching.com. Both of those addresses have Lackeys behind them who take their job seriously.

I do take your point sTeamTraen. May be the OP felt a little alone and wanted another take on their 'situation'? We are all learning all the time in this game and perhaps the OP has learned something from the varied opinions here, I know I have.

[+Unobtainium]

i think i have gone into this too hot headed, the problems iv had are most likely the conciqences of my actions, and a lack of comunication from me to the reviwer your last post was most helpfull and i appreciate you spending the time to write it.

I think it takes a big person to say this in public.

 

Thanks.

[+NattyBooshka]

i think i have gone into this too hot headed, the problems iv had are most likely the conciqences of my actions, and a lack of comunication from me to the reviwer your last post was most helpfull and i appreciate you spending the time to write it.

Good... much respect for saying that. Learn from the thread, and help your reviewer the next time. These guys deliver us the game we love. Think i'd hate the job... but I love the game.

 

Almost time to play the game.... young one has gone to bed very excited.

[+dalesmanX]

Open letter to Sea Cucumber101:

I very much appreciate you latest stance and applaud you for taking it.

My job is to help get caches published - publishing them is far easier than having to reject them!

If you have any queries at all, or you disagree with my actions in any way, please E-mail me. I have never knowingly not replied to anyone taking this route.

I may well attend Mandy's Duck Race Day, although it is not certain yet. I will be easy to spot as I will be wearing my DalesmanX shirt. Mandy will be only too pleased to point me out! Please introduce yourself and let's have a civilised natter face-to-face.

 

 

To all others participating in this thread - can we now draw it to a conclusion and leave the two protagonists to sort out their differences?

[+JollyJax]

Open letter to Sea Cucumber101:

I very much appreciate you latest stance and applaud you for taking it.

My job is to help get caches published - publishing them is far easier than having to reject them!

If you have any queries at all, or you disagree with my actions in any way, please E-mail me. I have never knowingly not replied to anyone taking this route.

I may well attend Mandy's Duck Race Day, although it is not certain yet. I will be easy to spot as I will be wearing my DalesmanX shirt. Mandy will be only too pleased to point me out! Please introduce yourself and let's have a civilised natter face-to-face.

 

 

To all others participating in this thread - can we now draw it to a conclusion and leave the two protagonists to sort out their differences?

 

I dont care what they say, DalesmanX is OK by me ...( you can pay me now)

 

Since moving North I had no problems with any listing from him and in fact some patience and lenient approaches at times when setting caches and events.

 

Rarely use the forums but saw the thread and wanted things balanced by the good side of reviewers as well

[+sea_cucumber101]

aye sorry about that, ill look forward to meeting you

[Pup Patrol]

Thank you, DalesmanX.

 

It's not fair to criticize someone in a public forum if they aren't here to defend themselves or explain their side of the story.

 

When it comes to a cacher and a reviewer, these issues are indeed best worked out between them. As was said to the OP, a reviewer is probably trying to communicate with you. If you don't respond, there's not much else the reviewer can do.

 

I think Dalseman's last post shows what super reviewers we have here.

 

And to the OP, I think maybe you should sit down with the Guidelines and read them and read them and read them again.

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php

 

Your reviewer was trying to help you learn the distinctions between different types of caches. To continue your argument / criticism against him on your cache page was not a responsible thing to do. That sort of behaviour will get you a not-so-good reputation amongst your local cachers.

 

I'm glad to hear that you have calmed down now and can see where the problems are rooted. It's vital to keep the lines of communication not only open, but very clear,

 

Good luck with your future cache placements, and have fun at the event. A duck race day sounds like a blast.

[+thehoomer]

Open letter to Sea Cucumber101:

I very much appreciate you latest stance and applaud you for taking it.

My job is to help get caches published - publishing them is far easier than having to reject them!

If you have any queries at all, or you disagree with my actions in any way, please E-mail me. I have never knowingly not replied to anyone taking this route.

I may well attend Mandy's Duck Race Day, although it is not certain yet. I will be easy to spot as I will be wearing my DalesmanX shirt. Mandy will be only too pleased to point me out! Please introduce yourself and let's have a civilised natter face-to-face.

 

 

To all others participating in this thread - can we now draw it to a conclusion and leave the two protagonists to sort out their differences?

 

I dont care what they say, DalesmanX is OK by me ...( you can pay me now)

 

Since moving North I had no problems with any listing from him and in fact some patience and lenient approaches at times when setting caches and events.

 

Rarely use the forums but saw the thread and wanted things balanced by the good side of reviewers as well

Blimey, things must've got interesting to see me Uncle Bob on here. Great to have your input Jollyjax .

[+Hampk]

Hmm..

 

It's a tough job, and someone's got to do it.. I think they do a dadgum good job.

 

In my various communications with our reviewers over the years, I have always found them to be fair, understanding, and to the point.

 

They have to interpret the guidelines. Someone has to..! Let's face it, there's more than enough cache-litter around the country as it is.

 

If you don't like what they say, talk to them. That's what they are there for, after all.

[+sTeamTraen]

i think i have gone into this too hot headed, the problems iv had are most likely the conciqences of my actions, and a lack of comunication from me to the reviwer your last post was most helpfull and i appreciate you spending the time to write it.

If you mean me, then thanks. And in turn, thanks to you for writing this.

[+Us 4 and Jess]

You may just meet Keith (DalesmanX) at event close to you very soon!! Not sure whos event it is though

 

I gotta say though Keith helped me greatly with my 100 series, I could not have done it with out him and I have a great deal of respect for him, even though we have a love hate relationship I love him to bits when he publishes my caches, cal him a tight Yorkshire git when he refuses them and he thinks I am a PITA

 

Keith is a bundle of laughs and calls a spade a spade typical Yokshire man really !! He is only a newbie reviewer and is just learning the ropes really he makes mistakes like all of us do, but he is definitely fair........infact he's a bit of a soft touch really ( I didn't say that if Deci is reading this )

 

You gotta remember he does have a life outside of caching too, but I have always found if I email him to ask for help or to have a grumble, which I do regularly, he has always replied the same day or I have got an out of office reply saying he is away without tinter web/on holiday/busy/ignoring me (not really)

 

There is a super photo of Keith up a tree looking for a cache at my last Teddy Bears Picnic Event ... I am sure when you come along to my "ducks" event at the end of the month and you actually meet Keith face to face you will change your mind

 

Mandy

Edited June 11, 2011 by Us 4 and Jess